Eric Schmidt: Google Glass Critics 'Afraid of Change,' Society Will Adapt 331
curtwoodward writes "Eric Schmidt came to Harvard this week to discuss his new book, but many students really wanted to know more about the implications for privacy and social interaction once Google Glass starts hitting the market. Schmidt cautioned against jumping to the worst conclusions, saying that society always tends to adapt to new technologies — and he's hoping for etiquette rather than government regulation. Of course, that's what you would say if you used to run a company that has been fined and paid settlements to regulators for the way it scoops up data and tracks users. But Schmidt also doesn't have much patience for critics: 'Criticisms are inevitably from people who are afraid of change, or who have not figured out that there will be an adaptation of society.'"
Segway (Score:4, Interesting)
...
Google Glass is the new Segway (Score:5, Interesting)
Radical Change Product= Radical Change Product
Where can it be used legally? = Where can it be used legally?
How comfortable are people going to be when they see you have one and they don't? = How comfortable are people going to be when they see you have one and they don't?
Kinda Spend y - people who can't afford it will be all sour grapes. :-)
Re:Big words... (Score:5, Interesting)
Frankly, he's a bit of a loose cannon, if I was a Google executive, I'd think about ways to muzzle him.
Google karma down (Score:2, Interesting)
I don't know about you, but I'm despising Google more and more with every passing day. I think they are going to be right there with Microsoft if they continue down this path.
Yeah right, students concerned about privacy (Score:0, Interesting)
Are these the same students who post every fart on twitter?
There are three kinds of people, a gigantic group wish to share everything they do with as many people as possible. A tiny group that are afraid that aliens are scanning their minds and a miniscule group of people who realize that anything you do in public is public.
Take Googles scanning of Wifi access points. People who have them probably didn't think about someone taking the effort to scan them all BUT you are broadcasting a signal into public space for all to see, why shouldn't someone else be allowed to record it then? It is funny to see people argue that media content broadcasted into the ether should be allowed to be picked by anyone since it is broadcasted into public space yet peoples wifi signals broadcasted into the same ether and public space should be private. Granted, sometimes it is not the same people arguing both but there is an overlap.
Personally I have little need or desire for the camera part of these glasses BUT I am ALSO aware that any public performance, the glow from phone screens as people try to record the show is almost blinding. And from pubs to attraction parks the sight of people recording themselves and others with their phones has become near universal. It used to be that at a company outing, one designated person had a camera, now everybody is snapping away. And not just a group foto or two but everything.
Reality TV has never been more popular and is basically about "ordinary" people showing everything we used to keep private and the entire nation gobbling it up.
So where is this concern for privacy? The general public doesn't seem to care in the least. Maybe they should but as long as the people advocating it remain either the clearly insane or people who scream about privacy while posting their turds to the world begging for everyone to watch... well... I am just not going to worry that much because to be honest, I am on slashdot. The only things people could find out about me that I waste to much time posting on slashdot (which is information publicacly available by checking my history), and my real secret that I am way to unmanly when it comes to cute little cuddly wuffly kitten wittens... ooops.
If you want to get people rightfully worried about the implacations of privacy, you need to come up with a better story then black helicopters AND/OR "I behaved like an ass in public and I don't want to be hold accountable for it".
Take the old "A drunk picture stopped me from being hired" crap... yeah, it happens. So? Don't work for those kind of companies then. I know plenty of employers that when confronted with such evidence would go "you call that being drunk? that is nothing, when I was a student we REALLY got drunk". There have ALWAYS been companies were you weren't hired if they didn't see you in church on Sunday. Anyone who has grown up in a small community knows that the modern age of facebook and twitter is in a way far more private. There is now so much information about, nobody has time to shift through it all but in a small town, you are the only thing to watch for the curtain twitchers.
Give me a million google glass over 1 pair of eyes across the street behind the curtains any day. Nobody is going to bother trying to find me in a million feeds but those eyes are recording and reporting everything and they never forget or forgive.
Sometimes we should fear change. (Score:2, Interesting)
If someone threated, for example, to CHANGE the relative locations of his facial features (to rearrange his face, so to speak,) I'd wager he'd be "afraid" of such a change too, the smug, hypocritical bastard.
We don't much like the idea of people walking around having the ability to snap photos without having to do anything making it at least a little obvious that they're taking them, the same way we don't like, 364 days out of the year, people walking around wearing masks and costumes that obscure their faces so you can't tell who they are or what expression they're wearing.
Schmidt's supercilious attitude that anyone who doesn't like people walking around with cameras perched on their heads recording continuously is a Luddite, is an insult, quite frankly. How do you suppose he'd feel about people recording HIM everywhere he goes? For the sake of argument, let's pretend that he, like most of the rest of us, can't go off somewhere to hide from prying eyes and ears, given most of the rest of us aren't rich. He probably would feel different.
I have a bad feeling that people using Google Glass are going to get assaulted, battered, and have their "Glasses" ripped off their heads and shoved up their asses. The Schmidthead apparently thinks etiquette will keep people from misbehaving... he's really living in lala-land if he believes that schmidt.
As for society adapting, I think people will start to take more steps to avoid being photographed, such as with disguises, large sunglasses, etc., which I may have to go out and buy now.
When did Google cross over to the Dark Side (TM)? Does anyone know? They're clearly evil now, but when did it actually happen? When did they start down the Dark Path?
Re:Afraid of change (Score:2, Interesting)
Sometimes the geeks are so narrowly obsessed they miss the big picture.
The same geeks laughed at the PC like we do the IPAD when it came out because it was not as cool as the mainframe when doing word processing. Look whom won?
I bashed the IPAD too as I wanted a hip macbook and heard the rumors of a low cost netbook and found iOS a neutered cell phone OS. Boo! I was wrong and misunderstood that some people just didn't give a shit about a full featured OS. I missed the point as I was a geek who was narrow.
Same is true with some Linux folks I see touting how XP users in hospitals who are sticking with their old software due to costs recommend Linux. I hate to tell you guys this but without apps who gives a fuck!? You mean GNU is going to donate the $10,000 required for certification? How sweet etc.
The geeks are afraid of change which is Windows. And the doctors are the ones who rightfully do not want to change as their software only runs on XP and why fix what is not broken?
Re:Segway (Score:5, Interesting)
Just because the Schmidt spent millions of dollars developing a product doesn't mean it will be a success - only time will tell that. The Segway didn't crack the market, and google glass might not.
Personally speaking, I wouldn't mind something like a ruggedized google glass for snow boarding, long distance running, or other sporting activities where you want to track things like speed, heart rate etc, but I can't see myself wearing something like that on a daily basis just to walk around town.
But maybe there is a segment of society that needs to know the location of the nearest burger joint stat, and doesn't have the attention span to remember how to get there without walking into walls unless the directions are drip fed to them every 5 seconds. There are certainly many other multi-billion dollar industries out there from which I have never bought a single product.
Re:criticisms (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Segway (Score:5, Interesting)
I think his comment was aimed more at those who simply don't want to be recorded 24x7. Although this is becoming the norm in some of the larger metro areas across it's not all that common in the U.S for example.
I actually find I'm not all that comfortable with it either and I'm no criminal. It just has a bit of a creepy vibe that's hard to ignore.
It's also hard to ignore Google primary business profit motive. Couple that with these, and the likely place that these sorts of clips, photos, and video's will end up, and it just turns me off to the idea.
My personal opinion, but it is what it is.